Agree with this article. The only problem is and I really don't understand why PC gamers don't get this; consoles are not in competition with 3,000 to 10,000 dollar gaming PC's. PC gaming at that level is a niche , technophile market. What kind of person adds a new sound card and RAM just to play a single title they way it should be played? Not John Q. Public!

the problem with PC games = that not evryone can play a game with all settings to the maximum, not evry one has 1000's of dollars.

latency between GFX card CPU, RAM, DSP....can just be horrible even if you are running on a dual core 3.2 ghz....not only do you have to understand how computers work.....you have to pay much money if you really want to build a PC that is a monster.

for Consoles you wont need any knowledge about SPECS and what you all need to run a game on its maximum.

BTW: i dont see ZELDA/METROID and Such going to the PC. ....i stopt pc gaming a long time ago....im fed up with PC problems

I hate "boutique" computers. You can build one yourself that is very nearly as powerful for a helluva lot less money than they charge. That little 2% of extra oomph they give you surely isn't worth the thousands of dollars more that you pay them for it.

Actually, the initial cost of building your own PC can be more expensive than a console, sure.

However, upgrading once every year and a half is cheaper than buying a new console in the end. And even though I love my xbox360, if a game comes out for the PC, I buy it for the PC instead. You console only guys really have no idea how many features they cut back on when they make a game for a console.

I'll provide one example for you because I was really upset about it. Last year I got Battlefield 2 for the xbox (same content as the 360 version). I had gotten this game after playing the demo on the PC all summer long, but stopped after being annoyed with my computer crashing. The xbox version had all the character classes messed with, squads were taken out, and there was no commander mode. In the PC version, to heal people as a medic you could take out a med-pac and people withing about a 10 foot radius would slowly be healed, or you could drop a pack for one person to heal up quickly. Same thing went for the engineer class but with ammunition instead. On the PC you could join squads and your squad leader could accept orders from the commander or he could give you orders. The squad leader could also request artillery strikes at different points which the commander could either accept or deny. Being in a squad also gave the player the advantage of spawning anywhere the squad leader was on the map, even if they were in a vehicle, (great for when the leader is flying the Black Hawk). As a commander you could issue orders, call artillery strikes, call in UAVs, and all of this was done from on the battlefield as any character class. Did I mention the game played lag free with 64 players? <-rhetorical question

With all of the squad features cut and the multiplayer cut to 24 which still ran bad, not to mention the character classes being different, I was severely disappointed with the game.

I'll take your words as compliments. There is nothing wrong with having knowledge about computers. If we are the geeks what does that make you? An uneducated couch potato? PC gameing is for enthusiasts who enjoy being in full control of the system. So sit there in front of your tv and enjoy your simple mind numbing experience. P.S. The only people who reference the lack of a social or love life most likley have none themselves

I am not a geek! I am married and have 3 kids. I am an IT Manager making a very comfortable living. If you think playing on PC's or being extremely knowledgable about PC's makes you a geek, you are sadly mistaken.

Geeks get to have fun and get loads of money. Geeks are the ones who build the consoles, computers, handhelds, and what not. Without these geeks the public would have nothing to do exept watch tv. Oh, TV was made by geeks too. AS was cable and Direct tv, and satilites, and cars...

is that their games are always getting better. so say you buy a pc now that works with the current latest games, give it 2 years and you'll need more RAM or a new graphics card if you still wanna play the lastest game and high graphics settings. with consoles all games that come out for 360 or wii or ps3 will work on that console. period. thats why pc gaming sucks. use a comp for the net and word documents. use a console for gaming.

I have a life, Thank you very much!! I'm a 23 yr old Night club promoter in the Boston area who makes a really decent check when the week is over. Spending my life infront of a computer by myself on weekends ain't my idea of fun. But do you my friend; do you!!

Is a $11,000 PC THAT much better than a PS3/360? In my opinion, no, but there is a small group who does think so, and that is fine for them.

For me, $11,000 probalbly comes close to covering the money I'll spend on consoles and games for the next 15 years - having the latest consoles and games. That PC will be bottom of the barrel in 5 years tops. Heck, my $1500 laptop that I bought 4 years ago couldn't play the current games a year after its release due to a crappy graphics card that is not upgradeable. Sure, you can upgrade these PCs, but at what cost?

2 core proccesors and I bet the graphics card don't even match that of the Xbox 360 and the PS3 I'mean you minus put the CELL in those 2 computers they may look tough on the outside but the inside doesn't even look powerful at all.